SLAPP suits and legal intimidation: Difference between revisions
made it a proper article and removed stub notice |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
To protect freedom of speech, many jurisdictions have passed anti-SLAPP laws. These laws typically allow a defendant to file a motion to strike or dismiss on the grounds that the case involves protected speech on a matter of public concern. The plaintiff then bears the burden of showing a probability that they will prevail. If they fail to meet this burden, their claim is dismissed and they may be required to pay the defendant's legal costs.<ref name="rcfp">{{cite web |title=Understanding Anti-SLAPP Laws |url=https://www.rcfp.org/resources/anti-slapp-laws/ |publisher=The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press |date=2024-08-18 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> | To protect freedom of speech, many jurisdictions have passed anti-SLAPP laws. These laws typically allow a defendant to file a motion to strike or dismiss on the grounds that the case involves protected speech on a matter of public concern. The plaintiff then bears the burden of showing a probability that they will prevail. If they fail to meet this burden, their claim is dismissed and they may be required to pay the defendant's legal costs.<ref name="rcfp">{{cite web |title=Understanding Anti-SLAPP Laws |url=https://www.rcfp.org/resources/anti-slapp-laws/ |publisher=The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press |date=2024-08-18 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> | ||
As of 2025, 38 US states and the District of Columbia have enacted anti-SLAPP statutes, with coverage continuing to expand. California was the first state to enact such a law in 1992.<ref name="rcfp-guide">{{cite web |title=Anti-SLAPP Legal Guide |url=https://www.rcfp.org/anti-slapp-legal-guide/ |publisher=The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press |date=2025-06 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> The Uniform Law Commission adopted a model anti-SLAPP statute (the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act) in 2020, which has since been adopted in various forms by multiple states.<ref name="ifs">{{cite web |title=Anti-SLAPP Statutes: 2025 Report Card |url=https://www.ifs.org/anti-slapp-report/ |publisher=Institute for Free Speech |date=2025-10-02 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> | As of 2025, 38 US states and the District of Columbia have enacted anti-SLAPP statutes, with coverage continuing to expand. California was the first state to enact such a law in 1992.<ref name="rcfp-guide">{{cite web |title=Anti-SLAPP Legal Guide |url=https://www.rcfp.org/anti-slapp-legal-guide/ |publisher=The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press |date=2025-06-01 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> The Uniform Law Commission adopted a model anti-SLAPP statute (the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act) in 2020, which has since been adopted in various forms by multiple states.<ref name="ifs">{{cite web |title=Anti-SLAPP Statutes: 2025 Report Card |url=https://www.ifs.org/anti-slapp-report/ |publisher=Institute for Free Speech |date=2025-10-02 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> | ||
In April 2024, the European Parliament approved an anti-SLAPP directive providing protections across EU member states.<ref name="eu-directive">{{cite web |title=Directive (EU) 2024/1069 of the European Parliament and of the Council |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1069/oj |publisher=Official Journal of the European Union |date=2024-04-11 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> | In April 2024, the European Parliament approved an anti-SLAPP directive providing protections across EU member states.<ref name="eu-directive">{{cite web |title=Directive (EU) 2024/1069 of the European Parliament and of the Council |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1069/oj |publisher=Official Journal of the European Union |date=2024-04-11 |access-date=2026-01-14}}</ref> | ||